Gender inequity in the provision of care for hip disease: population-based cross-sectional study

Objectives To examine gender differences along the care pathway to total hip replacement. Methods We conducted a population-based cross-sectional study of 26,046 individuals aged 35 years and over in Avon and Somerset. Participants completed a questionnaire asking about care provision at five milestones on the pathway to total hip replacement. Those reporting hip disease were invited to a clinical examination. We estimated odds ratios (ORs) [95% confidence intervals (CI)] for provision of care to women compared with men. Results 3169 people reported hip pain, 2018 were invited for clinical examination, and 1405 attended (69.6%). After adjustment for age and disease severity, women were less likely than men to have consulted their general practitioner (OR 0.78, 95%-CI 0.61–1.00), as likely as men to have received drug therapy for hip pain in the previous year (OR 0.96, 95%-CI 0.74–1.24), but less likely to have been referred to specialist care (OR 0.53, 95%-CI 0.40–0.70), to have consulted an orthopaedic surgeon (OR 0.50, 95%-CI 0.32–0.78), or to be on a waiting list for total hip replacement (OR 0.41, 95%-CI 0.20–0.87). Differences remained in the 746 people who had sought care from their general practitioner, and after adjustment for willingness and fitness for surgery. Conclusions There are gender inequalities in provision of care for hip disease in England, which are not fully accounted for by gender differences in care seeking and treatment preferences. Differences in referral to specialist care by general practitioners might unwittingly contribute to this inequity. Accurate information about availability, benefits and risks of hip replacement for providers and patients, and continuing education to ensure that clinicians interpret and correct patients' assumptions could help reduce inequalities.

[Characteristics of patients suffering from chronic pain with depressive symptoms in three different treatment settings]

Only few studies considered demographic and medical characteristics of pain patients with depressive symptoms.

Physician speciality and pain reduction in patients with depressive symptoms under treatment with venlafaxine

Excessive pain perception may lead to unnecessary diagnostic testing or invasive procedures resulting in iatrogenic complications and prolonged disability. Naturalistic studies on patients with chronic pain and depressive symptoms investigating the impact of medical speciality on treatment outcome in a primary care setting are lacking.

Regional origin and decrease of pain in patients with depressive symptoms under treatment with venlafaxine

Patient's language, tradition, conventions, and customs may all determine integration into a society and are also part of the doctor-patient relationship that influences diagnostic and therapeutic outcome. Language barrier and sociocultural disparity of Eastern and Southern European patients may hamper recovery from pain and depression compared to Middle European patients in Switzerland.

[Chronic right-sided pain-associated nondermatomal somatosensory deficit following an accident]

We present the case of a 48-year old man who, eight years after an industrial accident, presents with chronic right-sided nondermatomal pain and hypaesthesia to heat and touch. During symmetric peripheral touch functional magnetic resonance imaging revealed hypometabolism in the left thalamus, somatosensory cortex, and anterior cingulate cortex. Pain-associated nondermatomal somatosensory deficits (NDSDs) localizing to one side of the body are a frequent clinical entity, which are often triggered by an accident. The tendency of NDSDs to extend to adjunct ipsilateral body parts and to become chronic points to maladaptive adjustment of pain-processing areas in the central nervous system. Psychological stress prior to or around the triggering event seems an important risk factor for NDSDs.

Sleep restriction attenuates amplitudes and attentional modulation of pain-related evoked potentials, but augments pain ratings in healthy volunteers

The experiment investigated the impact of sleep restriction on pain perception and related evoked potential correlates (laser-evoked potentials, LEPs). Ten healthy subjects with good sleep quality were investigated in the morning twice, once after habitual sleep and once after partial sleep restriction. Additionally, we studied the impact of attentional focussing on pain and LEPs by directing attention to (intensity discrimination) or away from the stimulus (mental arithmetic). Laser stimuli directed to the hand dorsum were rated as 30% more painful after sleep restriction (49+/-7 mm) than after a night of habitual sleep (38+/-7 mm). A significant interaction between attentional focus and sleep condition suggested that attentional focusing was less distinctive under sleep restriction. Intensity discrimination was preserved. In contrast, the amplitude of the early parasylvian N1 of LEPs was significantly smaller after a night of partial sleep restriction (-36%, p<0.05). Likewise, the amplitude of the vertex N2-P2 was significantly reduced (-34%, p<0.01); also attentional modulation of the N2-P2 was reduced. Thus, objective (LEPs) and subjective (pain ratings) parameters of nociceptive processing were differentially modulated by partial sleep restriction. We propose, that sleep reduction leads to an impairment of activation in the ascending pathway (leading to reduced LEPs). In contradistinction, pain perception was boosted, which we attribute to lack of pain control distinct from classical descending inhibition, and thus not affecting the projection pathway. Sleep-restricted subjects exhibit reduced attentional modulation of pain stimuli and may thus have difficulties to readily attend to or disengage from pain.

Does land-based exercise reduce pain and disability associated with hip osteoarthritis? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Objective To determine if clinical guidelines recommending therapeutic exercise for people with hip osteoarthritis (OA) are supported by rigorous scientific evidence. Methods A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) recruiting people with hip OA and comparing some form of land-based exercise program (as opposed to exercises conducted in the water) with a non-exercise group in terms of hip pain and/or self-reported physical function. Results Thirty-two RCTs were identified, but only five met the inclusion criteria. Only one of the five included RCTs restricted recruitment to people with hip OA, the other four RCTs also recruiting participants with knee OA. The five included studies provided data on 204 and 187 hip OA participants for pain and physical function, respectively. Combining the results of the five included RCTs using a fixed-effects model demonstrated a small treatment effect for pain (standardized mean difference (SMD) −0.38; 95% confidence interval (CI) −0.67 to −0.09). No significant benefit in terms of improved self-reported physical function was detected (SMD −0.02; 95% CI −0.31 to 0.28). Conclusion Currently there is only silver level evidence (one small RCT) supporting the benefit of land-based therapeutic exercise for people with symptomatic hip OA in terms of reduced pain and improved physical function. The limited number and small sample size of the included RCTs restricts the confidence that can be attributed to these results.